Sentencing Disparity in Virginia A Call for Equal Justice!"Greater awareness of sentencing disparities that will ultimately lead to the discontinuation of such practices and more equitable sentencing within in Virginia's Judicial system." --Sentence Disparity in Virginia

Do you have or know someone prosecuted & sentenced more harshly and/or received more punitive sentence than a similarly criminal/crime situated case due to their race (Black/Hispanic -vs.- White) or sexual orientation (female -vs.- male)? Was the sentence outside the Sentencing Guideline, and/or a first time offender? Sentences well beyond the State Sentencing Guidelines recommendation. See below examples. We want to know, hear your story and if possible for you to participate in an upcoming documentary.

Example 1: Black male, first time offender, found guilty for marijuana with intent; recommended "alternative sentence" or up to one (1) year and six (6) months, yet received a sentence of "36 years!"

Example 2: Black male, under age 21, first time offender, found guilty of accessory to malicious wounding, recommended sentence 25 years, yet received a sentence of "Two (2) Life plus "30 years!

Example 3: Black male, age 24, first time offender, found guilty of robbery and project exile gun possession, recommended sentence Three (3) years to Eight (8) years, yet received a sentence of "one hundred twenty seven years (127)! ###

In 1994 the Virginia General Assembly passed laws abolishing parole for all persons convicted of non-violent and violent crimes committed on or after January 1, 1995, allowing only for geriatric release for certain class of offenders over the age of sixty or sixty-five. When these laws came into effect in 1995, the court rules at the time prohibited judges from instructing juries in non-capital cases that the offender would not be entitled to parole if sentenced to a term of incarceration, even in cases where the jury requests to know whether the offender would be entitled to parole. As a result, juries who sentenced offenders in the months and years following the abolition of parole were not instructed by judges that sentences under the erroneous impression that only a fraction of the sentence would be served by the offender. It was not until June 2000, in the case of Fishback v. Commonwealth, 260 Va. 104, 532 S.E. 2d 629 (200), that Virginia Supreme Court ruled that judges must instruct jurors in all non-capital cases that parole has been abolished. In reaching it's decision, the Supreme Court confirmed what had long been obvious to observers of Virginia criminal justice system: that instructing juries who will impose sentence that parole has been abolished would ensure a fair trial for both the offender and the Commonwealth. Sadly, however, the Supreme Court declined to make it's Fishback ruling retroactive, meaning that those offenders whose convictions had become final before the ruling would not be entitled to a new sentencing by a jury that is properly instructed on would not be entitled to a new sentencing by a jury that is properly instructed on the abolition of parole. ###

The Community Restoration Campaign (CRC) Supports the Sentence Disparity Campaign

for"Common Sense Prison Reform" In Virginia

Question? How is CRC connected to the the sentence disparity and unfair jury trial initiatives?

Answer: Proposed legislation with CRC are prisoner earned "good time"with the additional "sentence credit" to reduce prisoners sentenced/incarcerated on or after January 1, 1995 and/or the reinstatement of parole with 65%. Prisoners would be eligible to earn a total of 14.5 days for every 30 days sentence. For prisoners under the "old law" parole eligible, the CRC will help strengthen support for fair and consistent parole board decisions. This is alternative/in addition to resolution to filing an immediate class action. The goal is achieve a 50%/65% sentence reduction for Virginia prisoners. It's important that prisoners and their family be proactive in the listed below ways: